Slashdot Mirror


The Evolution of Mac Gaming

Next Generation has a piece up exploring where gaming is going on Max OS X. From the article: "Almost since the introduction of the Mac, Apple users have lamented the lack of game support provided to the platform as compared to its Wintel brethren. Sometimes that lack of support was due to hardware and input devices that weren't competitive with the PC, but the adoption of PC standards like AGP for graphics cards and USB support for 'proper' multi-button mice did away with those obstacles. But the largest reason usually has had to do with the size of the Mac market."

141 comments

  1. Escape Velocity? by HanClinto · · Score: 3, Insightful

    My friends always wanted to *emulate* macs for the purposes of gaming -- just the one game Escape Velocity. Heck, I *still* emulate a Mac just so I can play it from time to time (I know they have Nova for the PC, but I like the old ones better).

    Sure, Mac gaming pickings have always been a bit thin, but it felt like a tighter-knit community, and they still always had the quality, just not necessarily the quantity.

    1. Re:Escape Velocity? by Momoru · · Score: 2, Informative

      I used to crank out my old Mac for that very same reason, but now you can play on Windows boxes: http://www.ambrosiasw.com/games/evn/ . It's EV Nova, but its pretty much the same as the original, even a little better.

    2. Re:Escape Velocity? by MaineCoon · · Score: 2, Informative

      The old versions are available as mods for Nova, which work on the PC as well.

      --
      Hunt your preferred prey at Aliens vs Predator MUD. Join the war at avpmud.com port 4000
    3. Re:Escape Velocity? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      There are total conversions of EV Nova on the Ambrosia software website which use the graphics from the earlier games, including the menu screens, and emulate the gameplay. Quite fun, but a lot harder than EV Nova (which is relatively easy - particularly on the Polaris thread where you can buy ships that can easily destroy cruisers).

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    4. Re:Escape Velocity? by worst_name_ever · · Score: 1
      Thanks for the kind words. :)

      mcb <--- yeah, the EV guy

      --

      In Soviet Rush, today's Tom Sawyer gets high on you.
    5. Re:Escape Velocity? by HanClinto · · Score: 1

      Rock on!

      Your user profile just got another fan entry. :)

      EV drove me to learn how to do graphics programming in high-school, I was working on a multiplayer version of EV called "Air Locked" that actually made it kindof far before I lost all of my source in a hard-drive incident. Through that experience I learned a ton about programming, and that has proven invaluable to me through the years.

      So in short, thanks for the inspiration! :)

  2. Emulation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Much like Slashdotters and their PSPs, the main games I play on my iBook are emulated! It makes a great portable Gameboy Advance, SNES, NES, or Sega Genesis. We all bought those old games at some point, and now you can use your new hardware as the ultimate gaming machine.

    1. Re:Emulation by ucahg · · Score: 1

      Out of curiosity, what emulators do you use?

      I find it's always a struggle to sift through the not-quite-working ones and finding the real gems.

    2. Re:Emulation by chrisbtoo · · Score: 1

      [M]y iBook [...] makes a great portable Gameboy Advance

      Something about that strikes me as funny.

      --
      Registering accounts later than some other chrisb since 1997
  3. And why do we care... by DarkYoshi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...that "Pet Store Simulator" or something like that won't go on macs? Most of the games that I would bother buying can be installed on macs too (Blizzard RTSs) or have a Mac Edition which is the same thing but is made for macs. Any of the big games that I would like to play will end up on macs, so even though I'm on a WinTel PC right now, when I get my iBook or PowerBook, the gaming scene won't have changed too much for me.

    1. Re:And why do we care... by Itchyeyes · · Score: 1

      You obviously haven't tried gaming on a Mac lately. Sure there are a few developers (mainly Blizzard) that support the Mac platform for larger franchises, but for the most part Macs lag far behind PC's when it comes to gaming. Guild Wars, Half Life 2, Battlefield 2, Doom 3, Rome: Total War, Pirates, San Andreas... Those are just a few of the major titles released recently that are not available for Mac gamers. Furthermore, in the unlikely event that a big game does make it to the Mac, it is usually 6 to 12 months after the PC release.

    2. Re:And why do we care... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doom 3 is on Mac, and as Battlefield 1942 eventually made it, Battlefield 2 will probably come out after some unreasonable waiting period. Otherwise I agree with your point.

    3. Re:And why do we care... by PMAvers · · Score: 2, Informative

      A note on the HL2 part:

      Not really anyone's fault for trying... but, Valve's asking for both arms, legs, and a few organs for the rights for it, pretty much takes up the entire development budget.

      And, then, on top of that, Havok's asking for several *MORE* organs for the rights to *use* the OS X version of Havok. (According to a article over at IMG, they want six figures.) It exists... but, no one wants to pay it. See above about development budget.

      Article: http://www.insidemacgames.com/features/view.php?ID =351

  4. How about video cards, smart guy? by slughead · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But the largest reason usually has had to do with the size of the Mac market.

    What about the fact that most of the computers Apple ships come with a GeForce 5200 (iMac), Radeon 9200 (Mac Mini), or have crappy ATi laptop cards (iBook/PB) and are NOT UPGRADABLE? Not to mention the low RAM that comes standard.

    Sure, they ship the G5s with good cards.. sometimes.. but I dropped $3 grand to get my DP 2.5 with a 6800 Ultra in it.

    So blame the market all you want, I'm sure that's a good portion of it. However, if those MacIntels use stanard PC gaming cards, I'm willing to wager an upswing in Mac gaming.

    1. Re:How about video cards, smart guy? by DarkYoshi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Did we forget something? The iBooks now come with 512 megs of RAM standard. 512 is fine with me right now, as I have 768 in my P4, and it runs better than well.

    2. Re:How about video cards, smart guy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The latest games like Doom3 and World of warcraft want more than 512mb ram.

    3. Re:How about video cards, smart guy? by Golias · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Oh nos! Apple laptops don't have upgradable video cards!!!1!

      Well, duh.

      Anybody who's likely to buy a $400 video card is probably going to buy a high-end tower to put it into. G5 towers ain't cheap, but they are really sweet rigs for the tiny assortment of games which actually run on Macs.

      For those buying a mini or an iMac, the cards they come with do about as well as any $50 card you would put in a cheap game PC. I play WoW on my mini all the time, and the graphics are good enough on my sickeningly-huge projection system that I don't really mind the inability to upgrade.

      Are they great cards for gaming? No. Are the good enough for most people? Yes, especially since everybody who writes games for the Mac knows exactly what handful of low-end cards to expect.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    4. Re:How about video cards, smart guy? by WMD_88 · · Score: 1

      Not to mention they also want more than the Radeon 9550 that iBooks have. The PowerBook's Radeon 9700 is better for gaming.

    5. Re:How about video cards, smart guy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I play both WC3 and C&C Generals just fine on a radeon 9000 chip thats in my aging powerbook.

    6. Re:How about video cards, smart guy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh nos! Apple laptops don't have upgradable video cards!!!1!

      Well, duh.


      That's compelling. Why not call him names while you're at it?

    7. Re:How about video cards, smart guy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's the point of bringing up 2 year old games? The fact is that new games don't play well on new consumer Mac hardware, which obviously knockers the market.

    8. Re:How about video cards, smart guy? by NutscrapeSucks · · Score: 1

      Anybody who's likely to buy a $400 video card is probably going to buy a high-end tower to put it into.

      You mean anybody who is buying a Mac, because they don't have a choice.

      A "Gamer" PC System can be quite low-spec and cheap, except for the video card. You can do quite well for $500 plus the card. For the most part, gamers don't purchase dual-proc systems, for example, but with Apple that's the only route.

      --
      Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
    9. Re:How about video cards, smart guy? by Lars+T. · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There is more to gaming than 3D.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    10. Re:How about video cards, smart guy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Absolutely correct - it's also what keeps them quiet. You basically have a choice - a quiet machine with low 3D performance, or a noisy one with.

    11. Re:How about video cards, smart guy? by phil1984 · · Score: 1

      And new games play well on new consumer PC Hardware? Come on, the typical Dell uses an intergrated intel card.

    12. Re:How about video cards, smart guy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, and cheap enough that we have an old 'games' PC (modernised with a graphics card upgrade) in one room and a Mac for everything else.

      Macs will never be great games systems as the whole design philosophy is different (not from PCs in general but from gaming PCs in particular).
      The move to Intel won't change that - esp. with Jobs talking about power-per-watt. It's efficiency vs raw power.

    13. Re:How about video cards, smart guy? by michokest · · Score: 1

      It'll surprise you to see the FPS the radeon gets on the mini!

    14. Re:How about video cards, smart guy? by Golias · · Score: 1

      You mean anybody who is buying a Mac, because they don't have a choice.

      A "Gamer" PC System can be quite low-spec and cheap, except for the video card. You can do quite well for $500 plus the card. For the most part, gamers don't purchase dual-proc systems, for example, but with Apple that's the only route.


      Only if you insist on new.

      If you really do want to do the old "weak CPU, strong video card" philosophy popular among gamers, you could easilly pick up a used single-CPU G5 tower from eBay. It still won't be quite as cheap as a similarly spec'ed AMD box, but it will run quiet and have a pretty impressive motherboard.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    15. Re:How about video cards, smart guy? by chromaphobic · · Score: 1

      There is more to gaming than 3D.

      True, but less and less so as time goes on and 3D cards continue to approach ubiquity. A number of previously 2D games have made the move to 3D with their latest installments: The Sims, Roller Coaster Tycoon, the Civilization series will make the move to 3D with it's forthcoming installment, hell, even SimCity requires at least a modest 3D card with it's latest sequel.

      3D gaming has moved beyond the realm of the FPS, and soon it'll likely be difficult to find any game outside of shareware and children's games that isn't using 3D acceleration of some kind, even games/genres that you wouldn't normally think of as "3D".

    16. Re:How about video cards, smart guy? by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      You can buy or at least build a system that plays these games for less than 1k ('round 500-600 last time I went through the list). Sure, not typical PC hardware but the typical PCs go for much less than 500 (unless you shop in the wrong places) which seems to be the price of the cheapest MacMini which in turn is Apple's "budget" system. Misconfigurations will of course throw the price off but if you shop smart (yeah, like any non-geek's gonna do that...) you can get a lot of performance out of very little money.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    17. Re:How about video cards, smart guy? by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      And even those games (unless the programmer is an idiot) will be handled quite nicely by any "low-level" 3D card.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    18. Re:How about video cards, smart guy? by NutscrapeSucks · · Score: 1

      I just checked ebay, and 1 lucky guy got a used 1.8 G5 for $900. Otherwise pickings are pretty slim on such systems.

      --
      Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
    19. Re:How about video cards, smart guy? by dwightk · · Score: 1

      wait, you are talking about something that makes the small market even smaller?

      So what's the problem?

      --
      Like anyone can even know that
    20. Re:How about video cards, smart guy? by Scudsucker · · Score: 1

      A "Gamer" PC System can be quite low-spec and cheap, except for the video card.

      Not if you want to use a high end card from the last year you don't. 6800's and 7800's need to be paired with a fast cpu, or else they are waiting for the processor. Still cheaper than getting a G5 tower, but not *that* cheap.

    21. Re:How about video cards, smart guy? by mcbridematt · · Score: 1

      GeForce 5200 (iMac), Radeon 9200 (Mac Mini), or have crappy ATi laptop cards (iBook/PB) Thats still better than what, 80% of the PC market. Intel Macs are scary. Now Apple can relegate Macs back to the world of below-decent graphics for gaming. Of course, for the "I use Word and AIM all day long" crowd, this doesn't matter.

  5. It Wasn't Until Win3.1 by rsmith-mac · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Almost since the introduction of the Mac, Apple users have lamented the lack of game support provided to the platform as compared to its Wintel brethren

    Umm, no. Mac gaming was alive and well throughout the 80's and in to the 90's. It wasn't until the utter PC/Wintel domination around the time that Win3.1(1993) came out that Mac gaming started to become noticably weaker. This is by no means a market that has always been weak.

    1. Re:It Wasn't Until Win3.1 by Golias · · Score: 2, Informative

      I was about to say the same thing. Macs were widely regarded as the superior game platform until Doom came along as a PC-only app.

      The Doom deathmatch took nearly all gaming enthusiasts away from the Mac platform, and "PC gaming" has pretty much meant "Windows PC gaming" ever since.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    2. Re:It Wasn't Until Win3.1 by Lussarn · · Score: 1

      Macs were widely regarded as the superior game platform until Doom came along as a PC-only app.

      Mac was no game machine even then. Amiga, Atari, c64 and even spectrum had better and more exiting games than Mac.

    3. Re:It Wasn't Until Win3.1 by Golias · · Score: 5, Interesting

      As a C64 owner from the 80s, I can assue you that this was far from the truth, especially when Specter VR came out for the Mac.

      Networked PvP combat long before Doom.

      I deeply envied my Mac-owning friends back then.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    4. Re:It Wasn't Until Win3.1 by Lars+T. · · Score: 1
      Mac was no game machine even then. Amiga, Atari, c64 and even spectrum had better and more exiting games than Mac.

      Even if that were true, the PC was even less of a game machine.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    5. Re:It Wasn't Until Win3.1 by Halfbaked+Plan · · Score: 1

      The Doom deathmatch took nearly all gaming enthusiasts away from the Mac platform, and "PC gaming" has pretty much meant "Windows PC gaming" ever since.

      I'm not sure what you mean.

      Doom was never a Windows program. In those days, we all ran DOS games. Windows was just around to suck resources in those days. As far as I can remember it NEVER was advantageous to run it under Windows.

      --
      resigned
    6. Re:It Wasn't Until Win3.1 by cheaphomemadeacid · · Score: 0

      1993 The Year Of The Mac Gamers And Other Dinosaurs, skeletons have reportedly been found and scientists are doing their best to give an accurate answer to who these things actually were...

    7. Re:It Wasn't Until Win3.1 by NutscrapeSucks · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'd say the peak was back farther than that. Probably the best period for Mac gaming was 1984-1988, when many Apple II devs ported their games. (Alas, most of these games were hardcoded to the 9" screen and broke when the MacII came out.)

      In the late-80s/early-90s, the common knock against the Mac by PC users was that it was "cartoony". Apple wanted to promote a professional image, and actually discouraged Mac Game Development and made sure that the default Mac desktop was gray and boring.

      By the peak era of DOS gaming in 93-94, the Mac platform was already totally secondary, despite the fact it's marketshare was higher than ever. Windows gaming didn't really take off until 1996 or 97.

      --
      Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
    8. Re:It Wasn't Until Win3.1 by Vandil+X · · Score: 2, Informative

      I had many fond memories of playing Oregon Trail on Apple //e computers in elementary school and Maelstrom in college.

      Thankfully, Apple //e emulators are available today and the makers of Maelstrom have a free OS X version of Maelstrom as a free download from their site.

      --
      Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, START
    9. Re:It Wasn't Until Win3.1 by DarkYoshi · · Score: 1
      In the late-80s/early-90s, the common knock against the Mac by PC users was that it was "cartoony". Apple wanted to promote a professional image, and actually discouraged Mac Game Development and made sure that the default Mac desktop was gray and boring.

      That's pretty funny, since XP is more cartoony than any other version, (what with it's colored taskbar and all) while OS X has managed to be awfully nice to look at and proffesional looking at the same time.

    10. Re:It Wasn't Until Win3.1 by NutscrapeSucks · · Score: 1

      It was funnier back in 1993 when Windows 3.1 took over -- to the chargrin of the DOS/Novell Nuts.

      --
      Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
    11. Re:It Wasn't Until Win3.1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ah spectre vr, i recall setting up multiplayer games for that in my school lab, that and Corevette.

      for me, mc gaming was at itss best with Myth. granted it was duel platform, but the mac community was much more into than pc world where everyone confused it with myst.

      saddest thing about bungie going to M$, myth was let to rot.

  6. excuse me? by moosesocks · · Score: 4, Interesting

    AGP and USB are hardly PC standards.

    Apple adopted AGP around the same time as Intel did (which was a moot point nonetheless, as A) Most 3D cards at the time were geared for D3D and not OpenGL, and B) The cards weren't compatible between platforms anyway)

    USB on the other hand, was adopted AND EMBRACED lightyears earlier by apple.

    And stop acting like there's always been this huge dispraity between PC and Mac games. Sure, the blockbuster games were mostly for the PC, but Apple's definitely had its share of awesome games (Escape Velocity immediately jumps to mind) -- the big distinction between the platforms was that 3d games took a long time to get off the ground for mac users.

    Also remember that Mac users up until a year or two ago, typically ran MUCH OLDER hardware than their intel counterparts. Where PC users typically upgrade every 2-3 years, apple users typically don't see a need to upgrade for twice that period of time. A G4 running OS9 was laughable overkill.

    OSX changed everything, making it infinitely easier for developers to support mac due to the unix core, friendly APIs, and (tada!) proper memory managment.

    Even today, apple's getting some great open source games, and it would seem that the trend now is for the cool indie/OSS games to be written on OSX and then ported over to Unix/Win32. Lux comes to mind here...

    --
    -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    1. Re:excuse me? by Palshife · · Score: 2, Funny

      Judge me by my Name/UID, Mac gaming has been strong for a long time :)

      --
      Attention deficit disorder is a complicated issue, spanning several major... HEY LET'S GO RIDE BIKES!
    2. Re:excuse me? by vbrtrmn · · Score: 1

      By light years...
      1999 G4
      http://www.thescreamonline.com/technology/applehis tory/applehistory.html

      I think by 2000 most PCs had at least one USB port. Though Windows 95 didn't offer much support for USB, Windows 98 & Windows 2000 had support with an update.

      --
      it's a sig, wtf?
    3. Re:excuse me? by Tim+Browse · · Score: 2, Informative

      Windows 95 had USB support in OSR2.1, which was released in 1996. It sucked in terms of reliability, but Windows 98's USB support was pretty solid. PCs had USB ports way before Macs (I think the Gateway PC I used at work in late '96 had USB ports - if not, then it was early 97).

      The Microsoft Natural Keyboard (Elite) was released in early 1998, and had a USB connector.

      But yeah, Apple were light years ahead of PCs with USB. I think I'm nearly fed up of correcting Mac fans on this now :-)

    4. Re:excuse me? by Carthag · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It doesn't really matter that Gateway had USB ports around 96/97 (USB 1.0 is from january 1996), the USB boom didn't start until 1998, which is coincidentally the same year that Apple released the iMac. Also: Platform wars are dumb. Use the best tool for the job.

    5. Re:excuse me? by the+phantom · · Score: 1

      Palshife, eh? DIE REBEL SCUM!




      "Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING."
      ...
      Yes. Yes it is... that was the point, stupid lameness filter... ruin my delivery.

    6. Re:excuse me? by ksheff · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The USB standard was released in 1995. There was support in PC land, but it didn't really embrace USB until after the iMac. If you were a peripheral manufacturer and wanted some of Apple's tiny market share, you had to go USB. Even at the iMac introduction, the variety of USB peripherals sucked unless you wanted a keyboard or a mouse. Apple took the plunge and got everyone else who was standing on the edge just sticking their toes in the water to jump in after them. Why do new PC desktops and 3rd party motherboards _still_ come with 2 PS/2 ports, a parallel port, and a standard serial port, along with a collection of USB ports?

      --
      the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
    7. Re:excuse me? by NutscrapeSucks · · Score: 1

      AGP and USB are hardly PC standards.

      Both AGP and USB are Intel-developed standards that are licenced royalty free to anyone who wants them. Obviously, Intel had PC-compatibles in mind when they were designing these standards.

      --
      Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
    8. Re:excuse me? by trixy_1086 · · Score: 1

      I still have a parallel port printer, and my palm pilot still plugs into my serial port, and both my keyboard and mouse are still ps/2. They all work perfectly, and have for some time. Granted, most of the newer devices I buy are USB, but there is something to be said for legacy support. My printer still works great, my palm pilot still keeps my schedule, and the nice keyboard and mouse that I bought will wear out rather than becoming useless due to incompatability with a new machine. It's a similar question to wondering why video cards still come with VGA and DVI, since so many people have flat panels now.

    9. Re:excuse me? by Tim+Browse · · Score: 1
      Also: Platform wars are dumb. Use the best tool for the job.

      No kidding. That's why it bugs me when people tell me how great a platform is on the basis of half-truths. I prefer the truth.

    10. Re:excuse me? by ksheff · · Score: 1

      I have all those things too and they are working just fine with a computer I built in 1998. However, how many new printers and PDAs use those ports and how many people actually use those ports on their new machines? I would guess a lot less now than in 2000. I just find it odd that it seems like the phase out of DB-25 serial to the DB-9 connector occurred over a shorter period of time than it's taking to get rid of the ps/2, parallel & DB-9 serial ports. Especially since keyboards & mice were some of the first USB products (that I can remember at least).

      --
      the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
    11. Re:excuse me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You prefer what you understand to be truth, false or not. Don't feel bad, almost everyone does.

      The real truth is that almost all the PC motherboards I have that were manufactured from 1997 onwards had USB ports and/or at least pins for USB headers, and they were nigh useless for several years.

      As moosesocks correctly emphasizes in his post:

      "USB on the other hand, was adopted AND EMBRACED lightyears earlier by apple."

      He's wrong about the "adopted" part, and he didn't first-cap the Apple name, but he all-capped "AND EMBRACED." That's notable.

      Because, ultimately, the truth is that the number of USB devices that were released for use on any platform prior to the release of the iMac could be counted with the fingers on the average person's hands. Post-iMac? Sudden explosion of USB devices for both Macs and PCs, typically for devices that were/are compatible for both platforms. The reason - in a forward-thinking move, Apple ensured that iMacs lacked ADB (a bus standard which was already superior to the PC's PS/2 & serial port combo in several ways - yet which has been abandoned unlike PS/2 and COM in the slow-to-change world of PC interface bus standards). If that's not embracing the standard above merely adopting it, I don't know what is.

      There's your truth. Learn it, live it, love it, prefer it.

    12. Re:excuse me? by el_womble · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Especially as DB-9 and DB-25 were so homebrew hardware friendly. USB cost a hell of a lot more to develope for than RS-232. OK it sucks for data transfer, but its great for sending control signals. Great projects like an automatic coffee machine etc would be very expensive if there was no RS-232. OK, they're not going to set the world alight, but its one more avenue of computer science that is made less accessible.

      --
      Scared of flying, pointy things snce 1979!
    13. Re:excuse me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      USB on the other hand, was adopted AND EMBRACED lightyears earlier by apple.

      Lightyears are a measure of distance, not of time.

    14. Re:excuse me? by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Theoretically, since time and space are both just sets of dimensions you could measure time in metres. Of course noone knows how big time is (how many metres are a second?) so that's pretty futile.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    15. Re:excuse me? by IntergalacticWalrus · · Score: 1

      Hah, I remember that. The USB support in Windows 95 OSR2.1 was completely worthless. Basically it was just drivers for the USB host. There wasn't even a HID driver, and no hardware manufacturer bothered to write 95-compatible drivers for their USB hardware.

    16. Re:excuse me? by ksheff · · Score: 1

      That's a good point. I'm not sure how well the USB to traditional serial adapters would work in those cases. But the last time I was at CompUSA, I did notice that they were still selling expansion cards with those type of ports on them. Will the new Intel based Macs have them? that would be odd.

      --
      the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
  7. Release gap by aardwolf64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The issue isn't that the good games aren't available. They eventually make it over, and they must be making money (or they wouldn't keep porting them.) The major issue that I see is that Mac users don't get the good games until at least a year after the PC release (like Neverwinter Nights, to name just one.)

    I can understand not wanting to gamble on the Macintosh version before it is known if a new game will be a hit, but give me a break! Games like Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic were hits looooong before they were ported to the Mac.

    In my opinion, the best we Mac users can hope for with mainstream games in the near future is shorter porting time with the switch to Intel processors looming.

    1. Re:Release gap by slughead · · Score: 1

      In my opinion, the best we Mac users can hope for with mainstream games in the near future is shorter porting time with the switch to Intel processors looming.

      I don't want to make anyone sound stupid... but the switch to intel wont affect port times directly. The OS is what takes time to deal with, not the instruction set.

    2. Re:Release gap by agraupe · · Score: 1

      You do know there was a linux version of NWN, right?

    3. Re:Release gap by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and instead of waiting a full year for a full retail version, you only had to wait for 9 months - and get the data from a Windows version. Running on Intel obviously helped here - and the Linux version was supposed to ship shortly after the Windows version, while the Mac version was only announced then.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    4. Re:Release gap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It will only be easier on games where they're using OpenGL rather than DirectX (not forgetting DirectX is an API to more than just the graphics card).

      Or if Apple could provide a DirectX compatible API? I imagine the Mac games conversion companies already have tools to automatically refactor DirectX into equivalent MacOS calls, but it would open up using features provided by certain graphics cards.

      We're still not going to get the latest games though - not unless we get into the habit of buying a new graphics card every 18 months.

    5. Re:Release gap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhm, no. NWN was announced as a simultaneous release for all three platforms. Bioware owned up to not having full cross-platform support the week before shipping. I had to cancel my preorder. And the Linux version was playable within ~3 months (although it was a beta version).

    6. Re:Release gap by Lars+T. · · Score: 1
      So this page is wrong? As well as this? While they can't agree on the exact release dates, both claim end of June 2002 for the Windows version and mid-march 2003 for the Linux (public beta) client. Not to mention Bioware's Linux Client News Archive.

      As for the Mac dates, I relied on these IMG stories:

      and (from the first link): "20 Jan 2001 This game will be released simultaneously for Linux and Windows." Hey, maybe they just forgot to mention the Mac version.
      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    7. Re:Release gap by agraupe · · Score: 1

      No, you had to get the data from the CD. I installed it on linux without ever touching windows.

    8. Re:Release gap by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      Yes, from the CD of the Windows version.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    9. Re:Release gap by agraupe · · Score: 1

      I'd call it, more accurately, the data CD. Although it has the required files for Windows, it has all but the executables for Linux. If you can complete the entire install without ever using Windows in any way, or something like WINE, then I think it is more than a Windows version CD.

  8. Bolo by LennyDotCom · · Score: 2

    Anbody remember Bolo? It was a Mac game invoving tanks that you could play over the internet. I remember playing it in 95. It was pretty cool. Does anyone know of a PC game prior that was net payable?

    --
    http://Lenny.com
    1. Re:Bolo by Digital+Pizza · · Score: 1
      I remember playing the original Apple ][ version back in the early 80's.

      I also remember reading the original book by Keith Laumer.

      "The Dinochrome Brigade Salutes You!"

      --
      We apologize for the inconvenience.
    2. Re:Bolo by Maelikai · · Score: 1

      what? no link?

    3. Re:Bolo by Quarters · · Score: 1
      95 is about 6-7 years after the first graphic multiplayer game was released for all major platforms (at the time).

      Air Warrior was a world war II air combat simulator that ran on Macs, EGA/VGA PCs, Atari STs, and Commodore Amigas starting around 1988. At the time it ran on the GEnie network and all of the platforms played together in one virtual world.

      Air Warrior ran in various incarnations, slowly losing support for STs, then EGA PCs, then Amigas, then DOS machines, and finally Macs. The last version (Win9X, Direct3D based) was finally laid to rest at the inept hands of EA on Dec 7, 2001.

    4. Re:Bolo by EggyToast · · Score: 1

      Hey, thanks! I remember playing this game in high school but had completely forgotten the name. We always just called it "tank wars," which is, of course, numerous other games. Oh man, we had so much fun playing this on fridays!

    5. Re:Bolo by glorinc · · Score: 1

      BTW, you can still play these Apple 2 goodies thanks to emulation: http://www.emulation.net/apple2/

      I strongly recommend Virtual ][ for OS X users (it even emulates the 5.25" drive seek noises!).

      Game on!

  9. since the inception? I think not. by MyDixieWrecked · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Almost since the introduction of the Mac, Apple users have lamented the lack of game support provided to the platform as compared to its Wintel brethren.

    wtf are they talking about?!?! I remember way back when... before win95. Before the pentiums. Mac gaming was where it was at. When I had my 486, I used to envy the macs and commodors and amigas.

    Prince of persia is a prime example of the lack of sound and graphics support the PC world had at the time. The only decent games of taht time period were doom and wolfenstein3d.

    Macs had digital sound built in. no need for that soundblaster add-in card for real sound and music over the bleeps and clicks of the PC speaker. Macs also, generally, had more VRAM, too, so they generally had much more complex graphics.

    hmph.

    --



    ...spike
    Ewwwwww, coconut...
    1. Re:since the inception? I think not. by alan_dershowitz · · Score: 3, Insightful
      The only decent games of taht time period were doom and wolfenstein3d.


      I remember back then too. So...What about all the original Space Quest and Kings Quest games, the Ultima series, Might and Magic, Sam and Max, Elite, Diablo, Wing Commander series, and about a billion others that I can't even remember off the top of my head? There were a shitload of good games over the years for DOS alone, way before Win95.

      The SINGLE, solitary mac only game I can think of that anybody gave a crap about was Marathon. Mac ports of ANYTHING were few and far between.

      I wasn't a macintosh owner back then, but seriously, I never heard anybody anywhere say they had to get a macintosh to get the best games. The games I saw on macintosh generally were stinky shareware puzzle games or (the excellent) sim city.

    2. Re:since the inception? I think not. by MyDixieWrecked · · Score: 1

      oh yeah, I forgot about wing commander and all the quest games (kings, space, police and leisuresuit larry).

      shit... ok. my memory is skewed or something.

      but I have these distinct memories of being in the back of the bookstore in the mall in the computer section looking at comodore (sp?) and amiga and apple games wishing I could play them.

      btw, diablo came out at the same time for mac and PC, or at least very close proximity. I was playing it during hte same time that all my PC friends were heavy into it, so yeah.

      the mac had some cool-ass games, though. I mean... going back to the early PPC days, you've got Bloodbath, the Ambrosia games (escape velocity, maelstrom, barrack, avara, apperion, etc), dark forces, marathon, pathways into darkness, and more shareware games than you can possibly imagine.

      I kinda miss those days, though. it was so easy to hack the graphics in the game with resedit. and programming crappy little apps was such a piece of cake.

      --



      ...spike
      Ewwwwww, coconut...
  10. More great mac games by Robertatwork · · Score: 1

    More great Mac games http://www.spiderwebsoftware.com/ Geneforge 3 is actiually pretty good. I found this companies games back when I was runing Linux. There is also freeciv, and absoute backgammon. What else would I want?

  11. Who uses Macs? by dal20402 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    "0mg 1337 g4M0rZ" aren't attracted to the Mac in the first place, because the games are on Windows. And, really, they drive the market for new games, so it's only sensible to market games (especially, as TFA notes, niche games) to them: in other words, Windows.

    So Mac gamers are people who use their Macs for other reasons (all those reasons we endlessly hear about) and happen to want to play some games. This audience will never support more than derivative games and a few struggling indie publishers -- which is exactly the situation now.

    Having said that, Apple desperately needs to fix its OpenGL problems to make game writing/porting easier.

    ObligatoryNostalgiaAside: I remember playing endless games of NetTrek on my middle school's Mac Pluses. Networked gaming in 1987! And I still fire up mini vMac (yes, I have a Plus case in the basement) to play Dungeon of Doom once in a while.

    1. Re:Who uses Macs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      maybe apple should do a cross patent agreement with microsoft to get directX ported to mac osx?

    2. Re:Who uses Macs? by EggyToast · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I do also wonder if the highly modular nature of the x86 market helps the "get a new video card every year" mentality that subsequently helps drive games that, while not exactly pushing better gameplay or newer stories, at least pushes the graphics.

      Most people are happy working on a mac without ever really getting into its guts. That's a far cry from the "rebuild a PC every year" crowd who pushes for hardware advancements, sometimes simply because they feel like upgrading. I should know; I was in the same boat until I bought a G5 last year. Sure, sometimes I get the itch to put more RAM in my computer, but I'm at a point where it's overkill. For me to seriously upgrade, I would need to buy a new machine. I can't continuously graft new parts to the thing (well, I can kind of get new video cards), and that's even more true for the majority of machines from Apple.

      Since Apple controls the majority of the hardware, if they don't push for the latest and greatest games through their hardware support, then it doesn't surprise me that game developers don't pursue it either.

  12. The x makes it sound cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Max OS X . . . to the xtreme!

  13. Intel switch maybe good for OpenGL? by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 2, Interesting
    So I was thinking that once the Intel transition is finished, a game written with OpenGL will be very easy to port for the Mac. This looks to me like a very good reason to develop new games with OpenGL: a near-automatic 3% increase in customer base, probably more than a 3% increase in game sales (less competition in the Mac market).

    Either that, or the automatic porting tools for translating DirectX calls to OpenGL will get so good that even porting DirectX games to the Mac will be easy and sacrifice little in performance. Either way, this means more games for Mac, and this will be good for Linux on x86, because a game for OSX86 will probably not be too hard to run on Linux with Transgaming translation or some Mac/Linux equivalent.

    1. Re:Intel switch maybe good for OpenGL? by MouseR · · Score: 4, Informative

      Problem is that MicroSoft is doing everything it can to move developers off OpenGL and into DirectX. In Vista, OpenGL is actually impaired and emulated from DirectX.

      So performance-inclined developers will be tempted to develop for DirectX wich isn't available (or wanted) on Mac OS X.

      It's just another MS move in attempt to lock-out gaming from Mac OS X.

      I bet they're nerver about mactel too.

    2. Re:Intel switch maybe good for OpenGL? by MouseR · · Score: 1

      ^^nervous
      (sigh)

    3. Re:Intel switch maybe good for OpenGL? by Detritus · · Score: 1

      What happens to all the CAD/CAM vendors who ported their software from Unix to Windows? I thought Microsoft decided to support OpenGL in order to encourage that migration?

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    4. Re:Intel switch maybe good for OpenGL? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1
      Ummm. You know OpenGL is platform independent, right? The whole point of it was that you could compile the same sources on your Sun, SGI, or whatever workstation, or even a PC. If a game is written in OpenGL, the OpenGL code will run on both Mac and PC (and Solaris and Linux and IRIX and...). It's the window set-up code that's non-protable, and sometimes some of the other code - although if you're using OpenAL, OpenPlay and SDL then the entire game can be portable.

      The problem is that it's a lot easier to start with cross-platform APIs and then port to Windows than it is to start with Windows APIs and port to cross platform code. WineLIB might help this, if it includes decent DirectX support, but it doesn't yet - I am somewhat surprised that several of the big game studios don't invest in bringing it up to the same level as Windows DirectX.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    5. Re:Intel switch maybe good for OpenGL? by MouseR · · Score: 1

      OpenGL support in Windows predates OS X as far as I know. So this decision was a good one for MS.

      But now, MS might be seeing Open GL as a double-edged sword. Like any standard it doesn't control, MS now want to lock their incredible user/developer base to their own system by forcing a migration to things they do control.

      OpenGL/DirectX isn't the only example of that. Java/C# and the PDF -like thing they're doing (forgot the name) come to mind.

      Now that OpenGL is good on Mac OS X, it's time for MS to move away from OpenGL. And some developers are following on this. Look at video card makers. Some already provide DirectX acceleration chips on them.

    6. Re:Intel switch maybe good for OpenGL? by tji · · Score: 1

      Why would games be easy to port because they are on the same architecture? The operating system is completely different. I don't think it will be any easier than porting an OpenGL app to current Macs.

      Obviously, this easy porting hasn't panned out for x86 Linux.. Even though it runs on the same architecture, very few games are ported to Linux.

    7. Re:Intel switch maybe good for OpenGL? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and the PDF -like thing they're doing (forgot the name) come to mind.

      Metro, which I believe is one of the reasons why Adobe got so spooked that they bought out Macromedia.

    8. Re:Intel switch maybe good for OpenGL? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually the new version of windows coming out next year will be running OpenGL 'layered' on top of the native drawing code. There will still be support for openGL of course but it will run on top of 'aero' or some #%$. I also heard that windows vista will peg openGL support at version 1.4. (check openGL.org)

      This basically means that windows vista will be running an openGL emulation layer (if i understand it) and the support for openGL will lag behind directX (or the wgf - the child of directx) siginificantly in the future to make many developers start to choose directx over openGL.

      If this is the case mac gaming will be seriously screwed in the future.

  14. Highlight Windows poor OpenGL performance by Logger · · Score: 2, Interesting

    With Mac's running on Intel we may see the poor performance of Windows' OpenGL performance highlighted. Earlier on slashdot was a report on the poor performance of OpenGL on Windows due to the fact that Windows translates OpenGL to DirectX on the fly.

    Could motivate M$ to improve their OpenGL support, which would be good for Apple.

    1. Re:Highlight Windows poor OpenGL performance by NutscrapeSucks · · Score: 1

      With Mac's running on Intel we may see the poor performance of Windows' OpenGL performance highlighted.

      Trolltastic. Go read the rationales for why Doom3 runs so slowly on Macs. A big reason is Apple's poor OpenGL performance.

      If OSX is ported to Intel as-is, it will be completely slaughtered by ATI and NVidia's highly optimized Windows drivers. Hopefully Apple can convince them to them to port their game-specific optimizations to OS X.

      --
      Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
    2. Re:Highlight Windows poor OpenGL performance by Logger · · Score: 1

      I don't know that we're really going to have to worry about "as is". Nothing is going to be "as is" when the final product ships, and probably for the following 18 months afterwards we'll see continued performance gains.

      Both Apple and M$ face having egg on face if they don't make equivalent software perform at competitive speeds on comparable hardware. Which actually will be much easier to determine now that a few of the larger variables have been removed from the equation. Consequently, I expect we might see boths companies to try and optimize the performance of their platforms.

  15. If a Mac user wants to play games... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They'll buy a PC to do it on. See, Mac users have the money. But I guess that won't be an issue when we get our Mactel boxes! WOOOHOOO

    1. Re:If a Mac user wants to play games... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      The Mactels will make it a lot easier to upgrade video cards. At the moment, Macs only take video cards with OpenFirmware support in the flash. This is a problem, since the only two people who sell them are Sun and Apple (and Sun charge even more than Apple). The Mactels will almost certainly be using the same archaic pile of crap that PCs use for booting and so will be able to use standard PC graphics cards (assuming driver availability - at the least they will stop being able to charge a 50% markup for different firmware).

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  16. For those whom the above threads bring back memori by FirienFirien · · Score: 3, Informative

    The Home of the Underdogs site has a *massive* list of games (810 at time of writing the article) for older systems and Classic. It's an abandonware site - you won't find Escape Velocity, since Ambrosia still parent that (fetch that from the Ambrosia website instead) but you'll find a heck of a lot of other cool stuff. And you'll get some startling revelations such as, for example, a game like Populous 2 - granted not hugely complicated, but there's a heck of a lot of stuff in there - takes a mere 2.6MB of space, which compresses to 1.6MB. Most items are bigger than that these days. The save file is a whopping 238 bytes. Wow.

    Anyway, a good list of games that bring back memories. Enjoy!

    --
    Browsing with +2 to insightful posts and a higher threshold makes the average post seen seem a lot more ingenious
  17. great... but by chrisxkelley · · Score: 2, Interesting

    i love gaming, it's fun, and its a great thing to do with friends, however- are mac gamers really that crippled? I mean, every fps shooter is basically multiplayer deathmatch, then single player shoot-em-up with a similar storyline to the rest of them. I play starcraft, unreal tournament 2004, call of duty, and doom 3. all on a mac. they run great and its alll you need. starcraft, well is just starcraft, the legendary strategy game from the late 90's, call of duty, ut2k4, and d3 are all great fps shooters. its all you really need. i mean, sure, it cant play half life 2, but do you really need it? is it really that great? what is so different about it than call of duty or doom 3? just my two cents.

  18. Former Mac Game Developer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I used to do Mac game development - I did the ports of a couple of the larger commercial titles on the Mac in 2001-2002.

    It generally paid very poorly, and support from Apple was iffy.

    If I was to do a financial break down of units sold vs what the average Mac development company got paid for a port, it was probably along the lines of about $1 per unit sold. 50,000 units sold was a big hit (not often achieved; 20,000 was more realistic), and it was not unusual for a game to take an engineer 6 to 12 months to complete.

    One of the more prominent commercial Mac game publishers tried to drive down the cost of development by using the bids of wanna-be developers with no experience to drive down the bids of the experienced companies.

    I've since moved on to console work at a major publisher/developer, and for once enjoy job security, great working conditions, and good pay (steady pay, at that).

    1. Re:Former Mac Game Developer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      :-)
      Oh great another Mac Game Developer who's gone to work for MicroSoft Xbox.

      Say Hi to the Bungi team for us.

  19. NOOOOOOOO!!!! by ravenspear · · Score: 4, Funny

    Oh GOD NO! PLEASE NOOOO!!!!

    I can't recall the number of hours that I wasted playing that. I could have stopped whenever, but I just had to keep playing to afford the Kestrel.

    I had almost gotten over my addiction, and I had even completely forgotten about the game, UNTIL YOU JUST MENTIONED IT!

    BASTARD!

    1. Re:NOOOOOOOO!!!! by wild_berry · · Score: 0, Troll

      You are Anakin Skywalker AICM place at your side ruling the galaxy.

  20. That was for a future version of Windows... by CreateWindowEx · · Score: 4, Informative
    Current generation OpenGL drivers do not translate calls to DirectX. In fact, under Windows OpenGL calls go straight to the graphics driver without much Microsoft code being involved, which means that the overhead can be much less, although it also makes the drivers more work to write and maintain. There used to be a MS-supplied "Mini-client driver" which allowed smaller vendors to more easily add OpenGL support, but MS dropped support of this a while ago.

    However, Microsoft has definitely been discouraging use of OpenGL on Windows for quite a while, and while I don't believe Microsoft is actually artificially degrading OpenGL performance in any way on their current operating systems, this effort probably has led to the hardware vendors devoting less time and energy to developing OpenGL drivers.

    John Carmack has always acted as a force keeping OpenGL alive on the PC by coding his games (and thus also the games that use his engine) for OpenGL instead of Direct3D; however, the current reports are that id is now doing dual Xbox360/PC development of their next-generation engine. Unless Microsoft is releasing an OpenGL library for Xbox360 (highly unlikely), this probably means that he is switching over to D3D.

    Since Apple tends to ship their consumer machines with non-upgradeable, lower-end 3D cards, any 3D game on the Mac is likely to be GPU-limited anyways, so using an OpenGL-to-DirectX conversion library may not be that much of a performance hit.

    1. Re:That was for a future version of Windows... by Creepy · · Score: 1

      As the subject stated, the poster was referring to is Windows Vista (nee Longhorn), which will have an internal compositor similar to OSX's Quartz layer. This compositor will take OpenGL calls and convert them into DirectX, but will only support OpenGL 1.3 or earlier and it's Microsoft's intention that that will be the last OpenGL support in OS (so it will never support shaders). This means that OpenGL in Windowed mode (composited) will be less feature rich and slower than OpenGL in fullscreen mode and as time passes, will be far inferior to using DirectX. What's not apparently clear to me is if Vista will continue to support OpenGL extensions that add the additional functionality to fullscreen mode, or if fullscreen mode will just be treated as a big window and depend on the DirectX context.

          Apple currently writes and updates the OpenGL drivers on mac (both hardware and software) and doesn't support the function pointer extension method you can get in Windows. If Microsoft blocks the function pointer extension support route, then fullscreen OpenGL on Windows will be restricted to OpenGL 1.3, as well, in Vista. This brings up one of the problems with mac games - if you want the latest and greatest graphics features, you need to wait on Apple.

      As for Direct3D and Id, yes, if they're writing XBox360, they're using DirectX, but it's entirely possible the PC game will support both DirectX and OpenGL through an abstraction layer.

      Consumer level machines on Windows are hardly ever upgraded, either, but they are extremely cheap. Most gamers will spend more that $500 to get a non-consumer level box with non-onboard graphics and hardware sound. Apple lacks a mid-tier machine with expandability (they basically sell low-tier machines with better stuff inside). This is where the majority of gamers fall, so basically, Apple is forcing themselves out of the gaming market - Apple needs a $700-1300 machine with graphics card swapability to break into that market and they don't have it. It's my opinion that this is Steve Jobs' fault - he thinks consumers want toasters (everything included, no worries!) and professionals want Indy cars (buy custom parts to continuously get best performance and add upgraded stock parts as needed), but he misses out on the gamers want street racers (buy a stock car, but replace parts to increase performance).

  21. Wine For Mac x86 by nukem996 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    With Mac x86 on the horizon I definitly see someone porting wine or Transgaming selling cedega for Mac x86. I wouldnt be surprised if it was included in the Mac x86 release, its Applest best way to best way to gain market share from M$.

  22. Games actually made me switch TO the mac! by JoshWurzel · · Score: 1

    Believe it or not, one of the big things that made me drool for a mac was Mechwarrior II. A special version was written for the mac to take advantage of some badass video card (Rave I think it was called). I saw it on my friends computer, thought about my crappy DOS-version graphics, and said "I MUST HAVE ONE!". It was beautiful. 10 years ago, if a game publisher wanted to, they could make a mac version that would blow the DOS/Win95 version out of the water. I imagine it stopped paying off to do so.

    Obviously its been many years since then. I've never been a big gamer (even before switching to the mac), and what games I do play I play on my PS2 or one of my 4 generations of Nintendo systems.

    For nostalgia's sake, I did find a copy of that old version of Mechwarrior and booted it up in classic. Still stunning!

    1. Re:Games actually made me switch TO the mac! by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1
      I hate to break this to you, but the special edition Mechwarrior II was also available for any PC with a 3dfx VooDoo graphics card. Sadly, it didn't work with the VooDoo2, so I couldn't play it (and the gameplay - single player and network - was better in Mechwarrior Mercenaries so I didn't play MW2 much anyway).

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:Games actually made me switch TO the mac! by JoshWurzel · · Score: 1

      My mistake, thanks for correcting me. In any case, the sequence of events is real. So it was a misguided reason to buy a mac...but I did anyway and I've stuck with them.

  23. iDevGames.com by 5plicer · · Score: 5, Informative

    To those interested in developing games for Mac, you should stop by the iDevGames forum sometime ;)

    Another similar site (which many of the iDevGames members also visit) is CreateMacGames.org.

    --
    The bits on the bus go on and off... on and off... on and off...
    1. Re:iDevGames.com by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      Sweet links!

      Mod Parent UP!

  24. Mac, not Max by powermacx · · Score: 1

    Max OS X? >Must upgrade!

  25. 99% of games I play are flash by tod_miller · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Check out 'N' a great flash game. The proble with flash is reusability of the modules, and the hackability of it.

    Looking at teagames.com and http://www.rit.edu/~jhb4598/jblog Java quake 3 map renderer (with rail gun) that runs at ~89fps on my stock dell POShit.

    Despite diverging proprietary systems, the dominance of flash and java in web and mobile gaming will ultimately (as technology grows) give us cross platform gaming. If Java can do cross platform quake 3 now, in 3 years will Java do cross platform Doom3 or Offset engine?

    Cross platform - its what you want!

    Play N today, it is supeerrrr333t, and they are putting out tutorials as their prime objective.

    Teagames hasn't tutorials yet, if you want, nag them to put some tutorials out!

    Thats all!

    Tod the guy playing slashdot and reading flash games... switch that... while getting paid!

    --
    #hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
    1. Re:99% of games I play are flash by hattig · · Score: 1

      With things like JOGL, JOAL, etc, cross platform Java games are becoming a real option I believe. Sure, they aren't going to be up to the standards of the latest greatest 100 man yeaer computer games, but that's probably only because they haven't had 100 man years of work spent on them. With OpenGL and OpenAL, and various other technologies doing all the work, the language you write the game logic in is becoming less important.

      The Light Weight Java Games Library is also a nice thing, especially as it is planned that it will be running on devices such as PDAs and phones with the next generation of mobile 3D graphics processors.

      And, oddly enough, graphics creation is getting a lot easier for the smaller game development team now because instead of putting leads of effort into designing great textures, you can develop a lot of simple textures (normal map, bump map, texture map, reflectance map, etc) which is a lot easier to do. That, and pixel shaders, object instantiation, etc...

    2. Re:99% of games I play are flash by tod_miller · · Score: 1

      Check out square heads demo (google for the webstart) and 'Trails' on miniclip.com.

      Brilliant.

      --
      #hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
    3. Re:99% of games I play are flash by hattig · · Score: 1

      That game is really neat, I'm getting way over 100fps on my new iBook. An impressive display of what Java can do when combined with some choice libraries. Great inspiration to do something myself.

  26. Emulators for Macintosh Site by Vandil+X · · Score: 1

    This site has a few goodies to try out.

    --
    Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, START
  27. Back to the Mac by wgray8231 · · Score: 1

    If gaming could return to the Mac, I could go without buying another Windows PC, EVER! Of course, I do more console gaming and we've already got Unreal Tournament GOTY running on Debian at work. What else could I ask for?

  28. Nowhere by tji · · Score: 2, Informative

    Am I the only one that thinks gaming is going nowhere on the Mac platform?

    The intersection between hardcore gamers and Mac users is very small.. If gaming is important to you, you probably wouldn't choose a Mac as your platform.

    With the console game platforms becoming even more powerful, I think more people in general will use them for all their gaming needs, and not use PC's (which may be a good thing for Apple, it makes PC gaming less relevant).

    Of course, there will always be a handful of games for the Mac. But, I see no reason why that will change in the near future, regardless of PowerPC vs x86, OpenGL vs DirectX, etc.

    1. Re:Nowhere by EggyToast · · Score: 1
      The way I see it, it's a difficult draw to get new people into gaming on Windows, let alone other operating systems. The focus is on multiplayer, with sometimes expensive video card requirements for an optimum experience.

      Will that attract people who prefer to play consoles? Will the focus on multiplayer FPS and MMORPGs really draw in new blood?

      I think it's going to be a hard sell. If mac gaming would essentially pull from the exact same market, then I think they're in for trouble. If mac gaming will pull from people who own a mac, want to play games, but have no way of playing them, and are looking to play those specific genres of games, then there might be something.

      But, heck, most gamers eat through games and are done with them in less than 2 weeks, and then lament about the lack of fresh games for 2 months until the next one hits. Is that going to attract ports? Or are macs simply going to get the occasional big game ported a year later, the very rare game released on both platforms simultaneously, or focus on less graphically intensive, shareware/freeware indie projects that don't focus just on FPS and MMORPG?

      Personally, I'd be happy if it stays in the realm of indie projects for cheap by people who want to actually develop fun gameplay.

    2. Re:Nowhere by Mspangler · · Score: 1

      "The intersection between hardcore gamers and Mac users is very small"

      I suspect you are right. Since my first mac in '89, not counting various solitare versions, I had three games, and one demo of a game. The demo was Glider, the three real games were Spaceship Warlock, Myst, and Diablo II.

      I'm still not done playing Diablo II. I got the Amazon all the way to the end, but am still working on the others. Unless I get laid off again, I may not have enough spare time for years to play out every character, in every major variation.

  29. There's Warcraft, and.....um.....Photoshop by r_benchley · · Score: 3, Funny

    Does anyone Remember the fake "Switch" ad that highlighted the dearth of games on the Mac? I'm a huge Mac fanatic, but I laughed my ass off when I saw that ad. http://www.ugo.com/channels/games/features/switch/ media/switch.mov

  30. Bungie Software by captainjaroslav · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Those two words, to me represent the biggest tragedy for the Mac gaming world. Games like Myth and Marathon and their sequels were like Doom and Warcraft for people with brains. These guys always had stuff that was way ahead of other game makers and they always developed for the Mac first. Halo was even announced when they were still a Mac-developing company (based in Chicago, I think) if I remember correctly. When I heard the news that Bungie had been bought by none other than MS, moved HQ to Redmond and was going to release Halo as the flagship Xbox game I... well, I really can't even talk about my reaction, I still get a little too choked up. The last brilliant gasp as a Mac-developing company was Oni, which was very late and lacked the mult-player features that it was supposed to have, but it was still an excellent game. Does anybody know what happened exactly? That is, did MS just have so much money that the Bungie guys couldn't say "no" or were they in financial trouble already? As I mentioned above, they seemed to be getting way behind schedule in their development, so it seems plausible that they were having money problems.

    --
    I'm just sayin'.
    1. Re:Bungie Software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If this link works, it should give you all you need to know: http://www.google.com/url?sa=U&start=1&q=http://ra mpancy.net/msbuyout&e=9797

      In short, yes, they were in danger of running out of money (the Myth II recall bit substantially into Bungie's profits from the game, and since they published their own titles back then, it meant not as much $$$ to go around for Halo development). Microsoft came in, offered them the money and stability to finish the game and make them THE MAIN IN HOUSE developer for a new console launch. To me, even with the Mac (and Mac/PC) background, is an opportunity that they would have been FOOLISH to pass up on.

  31. If you want KOTOR by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    buy an Xbox. Seriously, for the money it would take to get a mac gaming PC, you can easily buy a lower end mac, an Xbox and a bunch of games. Heck, for the money I'd blow on a mac gaming pc I could buy a mac mini and a Windows gaming PC (at least one that'd play Half-Life 2 and Doom 3)

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:If you want KOTOR by aardwolf64 · · Score: 1

      No need to buy an Xbox when I have a perfectly good PC to run it on.

  32. Mac gaming on intel by Coleco · · Score: 1

    mac gaming will probably takeoff when it hits intel cause:

    a) the hardware will be cheaper and more accessable and of equivalent power.

    b) There will be less programming challenges in porting games.

    c) More people will buy macs when they move to intel, again because they will be cheaper and more powerful.

    The video card issue I think is really holding back macs.

    1. Re:Mac gaming on intel by frostilicus2 · · Score: 1

      "b) There will be less programming challenges in porting games."

      Why should this be? The underlying structure of Mac OS X is vastly different to Windows and this will not change with Apple using x86 hardware. Also, as it is likely that few games are written in assembly (which could cause a few headaches in porting from x86 to ppc) it will be no easier to port much of the non-graphics code. Admittedly, vectorized functions (Using MMX, SSE etc) will be easier to port, but there is still the matter of the Mac OS X windowing system and Quartz as well as replacing DirectX library functions with ones from OpenGL (or perhaps CoreImage in some cases) .

      This is not trivial, and poses one of the largest challenges in porting a game.

      But it can be done, and a profit made, take a look at Aspyr et al.

      IMHO, the change in architecture will not have dramatic effects on gaming (although we should see faster graphics cards, and better optimization) apart an increased market share, which should result in more games being ported.

      --
      Nothing sucks like a Vax, nothing blows like a PowerMac G4
  33. Macs lost out on gaming by el_womble · · Score: 2, Informative

    when gaming became an industry. Microsoft, and this pains me to say this, were REALLY on the ball when they started to develop DirectX. OK, the first few versions were baaaad, but it proved to developers that windows wanted to concidered a serious contender when it came to games.

    I know 3D graphics don't automagically make games better, but it does mean that people are prepared to pay more money because they are buying an experience, not a game. I bought a Voodoo 2 in 1997. Everyone thought I was mad, even I didn't fully understand what it would do for the game, all I thought it did was give me more FPS (this was important as I was only getting 16 FPS in Quake 2). It was like see the difference between a paint by numbers Mona Lisa and the real thing - I was hooked. Now thats not a great example, as Quake 2 used glide, but if I hadn't bought that card for Quake, I would never have bought Half-life, Deus-Ex or probably my X-Box.

    The real point was that all of a sudden my PC became my console. Even though I used my PC for coursework etc, that was just something it did, what I needed it for was games. It was the other way around with Macs, and still is.

    I gave up on PCs two years ago - mainly because I got bored of FPS not progressing, and the 6 monthly upgrade cycle was killing my pocket - and getting me into trouble. All I really needed was a computer to work on, and a console to play on.

    Clearly there will always be a market for PC games, but I would expect it to shrink. If your spending $1500 on a new computer, then your spending $1100 on a games machine, and $400 on a work computer. That wasn't the case 5 years ago, it was far more like $1500 for a new computer, and you need every ounce of power just to get Office working properly. This means the even if windows continues to dominate, the percentage of high-end PC games is going start to shrink very quickly - and the PC games market with it. For that reason I don't think Macs will ever be a serious game platform.

    --
    Scared of flying, pointy things snce 1979!
  34. Wait, check your credits by ianscot · · Score: 1

    When Captain Hector comes by like that, you always want to be sure he hasn't drained half your life savings. And jump to hyperspace right away.

    --
    "Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
  35. so why.... by brizok · · Score: 1

    would you want to (right from the games release) limit your product to only a small percentage of people? I'm not sure what the number of Windows machines is compared to Macs, but i know there is way more windows machines. Basically just developing for the Mac limits your profit...also those l33t gamerz just dont use Macs. hah

  36. Apple snubbed games, now gamers snub Apple by loyoyo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A big problem: although there were great 80's Mac games, Apple did not support game developers and publishers because Macs are for "serious" and "professional" purposes such as office and school use, film, art, graphics, music. Macs are for professionals who make content for the entertainment industry, NOT for frivolous entertainment such as games. Then cheap dual processor wintel boxes became weapons of choice for 3D game artists. Microsoft brass and staff saw opportunity in games and fostered the industry. Apple brass didn't want their cute designer Macs to be perceived as toys, hence they refused to support games.
    Avid and hardcore gamers in the market for a computer will buy Wintel, not Apple because you can't play most games on a Mac. I won't consider buying a Mac until all games are supported.

  37. Just business by thundar2000 · · Score: 1


    Not enough market share to justify development cost.

    Just business, that's all.

  38. Consoles are the future for the gaming mass market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I personally believe that PC users will start to feel like Mac users have for the last ten years. They'll be looking at consoles, and pining over the latest, greatest games, and wondering why it takes a year for the PC version to come out, if it comes out at all.

    Oh, wait a minute. They won't be pining, because a lot of them also own consoles.

    Consoles are the future for gaming. Game development houses will spend their effort targeting them. It's already happening, because of the massive market, and lower development and support costs due to standardised hardware and software. Since a really high percentage of PC owners also own a console, porting console games to PCs will be uneconomic.

    Of course, there will always be the less mainstream games that will be PC only (perhaps because they need things that consoles don't supply, or they're targeting people who don't own consoles), but the really big budget games will be console first, or more likely, console only.

  39. Are you kidding? MARATHON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Marathon was around back then, and it kicked ass! My friend's family had 4 macs and had them all networked together. We used to get together every day after school and play the shit out of Marathon (a great game by the company which later made the Halo games).

  40. Some Old Mac Games by OMGBBQ · · Score: 1

    I've had Macs forever, since my father wouldn't allow anything in the house. (God bless him for that, hehe...)

    I also lamented the world of Mac games, but here are some that I played and enjoyed thoroughly. Some, true, were ports to Mac, but they still qualify (unlike Half-Life, which I really wish had been ported). Let's see how many of you recall these titles...

    Space Rogue - This was one of the earlier color games that sticks out in my mind. This was something along the lines of what Escape Velocity: Nova is today, with one notable exception (graphics aren't being discussed for obvious reasons) -- The combat screen wasn't a top-down third-person perspective; it was first-person, much along the lines of old SpectreVR, and you could operate in all three dimensions. All the while you hauled cargo (I could never get the cargo on Basruti...) and killed pirates, etc. Fantastic game.

    Spaceship Warlock - Another color game, one of the first CD games that I rememeber for the Mac (ran on Pop's 4x CD drive - lol). Another pirate adventure starting you out in the brig of the Warlock. It's great fun.

    Cosmic Osmo - I imagine there was probably one person out there who just freaked out at the mention of this game. Remember Hypercard (of course you do, this is the Mac forum...)? It was a hypercard based video game and it was insanely fun. I barely even remember anything about playing it but I remember playing it often. It was something of a puzzle-adventure; think Myst, but filtered for 99.9% of graphics and story. It was just entertaining.

    Bolo - Tanks. Destruction. Networking. I don't know how old this one is/was, but it's one I miss. Bolo was a -great- game.

    Spectre VR - Already mentioned, of course. LOVED it.

    Also consider...
    Dark Castle
    Beyond Dark Castle
    Scarab of Ra
    The Colony

    Apologies if any of these were already posted, but I love games; always found games to play on the old Macs.

    See, the problem wasn't the -lack- of Mac games, it's that every Mac gamer had 100 friends with PC games... they felt left out. IMO, anyway.

    --
    ... I can't believe this name wasn't already taken!!!